You and G-boaf need to get out more. Given enough time you'll find everything from smooth, broad asphalt to goat track labelled everything under the sun (or road regulations, in this case).

There is another subtlety which causes inter-departmental angst this side the rabbit proof fence: many "PSPs", shared paths and footpaths go off the road reserve (and therefore out of the reach of the traffic code) and onto either council land (and then under council rules) or Some Other Department (rail, ports, yadda, yadda). If you're really lucky, the PSP is on the boundary and neither mob will take responsibility.

Or even a quarter of a century, just to build a relatively short link between 2 trails: https://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/our-c ... in-bridge/But then this is in Melbourne, where a rail link between Melbourne and the airport has been discussed for donkey's years, but no action yet.

AdelaidePeter wrote:Education and enforcement can never be the whole answer. All the education in the world won't stop crashes, nor will any feasible level of enforcement. And nothing will change the laws of physics, which mean a cyclist will come off a (distant) second best in a collision with a car, let alone a truck. So I am very happy to be able to cycle off the road whenever possible.

I have to say I tend to agree. Enforcement is obviously very important, but the sheer volume of traffic, narrow lanes and winding roads makes cycling quite intimidating (edit: in Sydney) compared to Adelaide where I grew up. So much so it was many years after I moved here before I pulled my bike back out of the garage. And even now I will avoid major roads where I can on the odd times I’m commuting (I do most of my riding before work now and on weekends and will happily ride on the roads during those times). There’s no way my wife would cycle in amongst Sydney traffic no matter how well behaved motorists were. To have the option to bail onto the footpath where traffic is flowing particularly well and at a reasonable pace (60-70km/hr) but there’s no shoulder, bike lane or bus lane to ride in, would not be a bad thing, in my opinion at least. At the very very very least it’s a law that should not be actively enforced unless you are riding recklessly and actually putting others in danger.

Cyclophiliac wrote:Or even a quarter of a century, just to build a relatively short link between 2 trails: https://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/our-c ... in-bridge/But then this is in Melbourne, where a rail link between Melbourne and the airport has been discussed for donkey's years, but no action yet.

The need for an improvement to the bike path across the Causeway bridge at Perth was identified in a 1975 report. We are still waiting for a final plan on what to do 43 years later. They had almost committed to building a separate cycling/pedestrian bridge adjacent to the existing bridge (without a firm delivery date) but are now looking at tunnelled options and modifications to the existing heritage listed bridges as alternatives.

Cyclophiliac wrote:Or even a quarter of a century, just to build a relatively short link between 2 trails: https://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/our-c ... in-bridge/But then this is in Melbourne, where a rail link between Melbourne and the airport has been discussed for donkey's years, but no action yet.

The need for an improvement to the bike path across the Causeway bridge at Perth was identified in a 1975 report. We are still waiting for a final plan on what to do 43 years later. They had almost committed to building a separate cycling/pedestrian bridge adjacent to the existing bridge (without a firm delivery date) but are now looking at tunnelled options and modifications to the existing heritage listed bridges as alternatives.

Yes, I think I cycled over that once (I spent my first 30 years living in the Perth metro area). The Google StreetView pictures show it could use some improvement.

NSW needs to bring in a goon line or similar way of online reporting for drivers. They do it for littering from vehicles, why can’t we submit video for driving infringements too.

I tried to report a dangerous elderly driver and had to physically visit a police station and The officer took a note on a scrap of paper and probably didn’t even enter it in the system. I didn’t want the driver booked, just wanted someone to review the drivers ability as she was veering toward oncoming traffic and couldn’t hold a straight line.

bychosis (bahy-koh-sis): A mental disorder of delusions indicating impaired contact with a reality of no bicycles.

The NSW put out a regular newsletter where they pat themself on the back (of course) include self-praise for topics such as unpopular motorways.

In the latest edition from today - they have however included welcomed phrasing for the safe passing law. "Drivers must give cyclists safe space"

I like it that this concentrates on the most important part (within their current strategy) to help increase the safety of bike riders as the bike bell and the bike helmet are less important when it comes to preventing collisions with vehicles.

If drivers cannot pass a cyclist safely, they should slow down and wait until it is safe to do so, leaving the minimum distance.

Drivers who do not allow the minimum distance when passing a cyclists will receive a $330 fine and lose two demerit points.

To help drivers provide the minimum distance, some exemptions to the road rules apply. This includes drivers being permitted to cross centre lines when passing a cyclist, though only if they have a clear view of any approaching traffic and it is safe to pass.

There is a reference to a study - though details or access to the full study is not provided.

Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight Melinda Pavey said an independent evaluation of the trial estimated a 15 per cent reduction in bicycle to vehicle casualty crashes.

This is certainly positive but again, my criticism is in the lack of transparency as it important to also back-up the information (even if it does support cycling) as the ministers for transport and department have a history or using stats but not providing details and even ignoring or refusing to provide details.

The missing link however has not been address - this is enforcement. In practical steps it means training and guidance for the NSW police to understand and actively enforce it as well as improving the process of accepting reports from bike riders.

It has proven difficult for bike riders to submit their reports and video evidence and get results as it appears that each police station will respond differently - this can include a complete rejection or it can be a failure to process. Bike riders essentially need to know:- How can violations be reported?- What do the riders need to do/provide - what information, details, evidence is necessary?- What are the possible outcomes?

For example, in a serious case, a bike rider may wish to escalate it while there may be cases where riders wish to report the illegal behaviour to simply ensure that a drivers number plate is on record so that it is documented that they behave badly or a verbal warning is given with no formal traffic infringement notice. Understanding the desired outcome is crucial in ensuring that the appropriate information is provided and that the bike rider knows that the police will react accordingly.

AUbicycles wrote:The missing link however has not been address - this is enforcement. In practical steps it means training and guidance for the NSW police to understand and actively enforce it as well as improving the process of accepting reports from bike riders.

I don't see the need to train all police.If they just created a proper cyclist liaison division, which could be a single officer, then they would be an expert in evaluating footage and being on the phone with a local officer when statements need to be taken in person.

Everyone running cameras is tech savvy enough to deal with that liaison initial contact online (and even those who aren't will get a lot of community help offered if they ask), so all very efficient to manage at low cost.

Setting up an unmarked police bike with adequate cameras for good prosecution is also pretty cheap and easy.Only have to book one person a week and make a big deal of it on their social media and it creates the illusion that there are heaps out there which makes people afraid of being caught.

Thoglette wrote:Until they've walkedpedaled a mile in a cyclist's shoes that's not going to change.

That and 100 other minority groups. Which is impossible.That's why they create liaison and taskforce squads to deal with specific community groups.

Local police stations shouldn't be dealing with close pass complaints, that can be done better online by experts including civilian staff (who cost a lot less to train and pay).When highway patrol is attending a bicycle incident they should get liaison on phone loudspeaker while talking to the cyclist.

The issue is not about 'failing to understand cultural sensitivities' within a specific community group. I argue (along with many researchers) that the whole concept of "cyclists" as forming a cohesive group is, well, utter crap.

Utter crap which plays straight to the sort of bias that has the NSW police force running Operation Pedro not just once but five times. And keeping a straight face.

And it's just not acceptable when the police don't even know the road rules. And yes, one of the officers involved was supposed to be enforcing the 1m law. But instead we have "two police cars and three police motorcycles" tied up with this mess.

Practical experience always helps change perspective - but the training / instruction is necessary so police know how to deal with it. Previously many haven't handled it very well and with the appropriate guidance they know how to deal with it. It starts at the duty officer and possibly an officer in the station who looks after this types of reports.

I suspect the problem is only a little training and much more so attitude. The police like things where there is cut and dry numbers, such as red light speed camera's and breath tests. Where there is lower level of metrics there is an increased likely hood that the person ticketed will contest the ticket which brings in a whole stack of more work. Taking the attitude a step further [backwards], its a lot less work to fog off the complainant than to issue the ticket

Not sure if this is good news or not, form that report:Quote:Less than 3 per cent of drivers reported being involved in crashes when they were overtaking bicycles. About a fifth of the drivers surveyed said they were annoyed with the rule, but this did not worsen in the year after the trial began. The percentage of cyclists reporting intentional harassment by drivers also did not change after the trial began. Cyclists reported fewer incidents of road rage after the Trial commended. <End quote>

Thanks Bob, given my comments about the lack of education & enforcement I found this interesting

The evaluation showed widespread support for retaining the MPD rule. Implementation of the MPD rule could be improved by further public education and working with Police to assess approaches to enforcing the rule....

While Police had concerns about enforcing the rule, Revenue NSW reports that 61 infringement notices related to MPD rules were issued between 1 March 2016 and 28 February 2018.

roberto73 wrote:Less than 3 per cent of drivers reported being involved in crashes when they were overtaking bicycles.

Umm what? That can't mean what it seems to mean - that 3% of all NSW drivers have had a crash while overtaking a bicycle. I found the report and saw that sentence in context, and still don't know what it actually means. But I also found this:

"Drivers reported no change in crashes and near misses with a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction when the other vehicle was overtaking a cyclist (around 1 per cent for crashes and 5 per cent for near misses).

Which I THINK means (a) 1% of all crashes are due to overtaking a bicycle, and (b) this rate (1%) was unchanged during the passing distance trial.

Just saw a highway patrol cop in an anti cycling whinge thread on Facebook mention that some new passing distance enforcement tech is coming soon.No specifics, but sounds like an indication they are finally getting radar distance devices and will be conducting operations with unmarked bikes and the motorcycle cops down the road.

Jmuzz wrote:Permanent law may see a stepup in more serious enforcement.

Private video is always dodgy since it is quite easy to fight in court and it gets very expensive for prosecution to prove it is valid.Though that's no excuse for police not sending a fine and then dropping it as soon as it is challenged. That at least scares people.

Real enforcement needs to be unmarked cops on bikes running a calibrated camera or more techy radar etc.

Hopefully now that trial is finished NSW will trial bikes on footpaths and crossings. I'm happy with a 10kph or so limit (with +100% measurement tolerance to account for bad/no speedo and difficulty getting a radar reading), better than current blanket ban.

I very much doubt the police have a calibrated camera.

Why would you think private video is dodgy? If you have a video of a car hitting you, that is pretty good evidence that they were within a metre.

Motorists hate cyclists and cyclists hate the motorists and the pedestrians hate the bikers and everybody hates the trucks.

If challenged in court it is fairly easy to have a private camera evidence thrown out, which then leaves police with no case and a court bill to pay.

They can issue the ticket and hope the accused simply pays it without contesting, which is what the EPA litter report fines do and why they don't really care about any evidence being provided with the report. They will drop the fine before court.

Jmuzz wrote:If challenged in court it is fairly easy to have a private camera evidence thrown out, which then leaves police with no case and a court bill to pay.

Utter hearsay, to be polite.

Again, this is nonsense pushed by certain lazy public employees who can't be arsed doing their jobs. E.g. the QLD passing laws thread has plenty of examples of both successful used of private camera evidence and lazy public employees who can't be arsed doing their jobs

Last edited by Thoglette on Thu Jul 26, 2018 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.